St. Helena council adopts streets master plan, directs staff to use it to guide future projects

The St. Helena City Council voted unanimously on May 5, 2026, to accept the St. Helena Streets Master Plan and direct city staff to use the document to guide future capital improvement programming, grant applications and transportation project implementation. The motion passed 4-0, with Council members Bareric and Spado, Vice Mayor Dy and Mayor Dorne recorded in the affirmative.

The plan, assembled by Tool Design Group with technical support from Farah Pierce, consolidates prior studies and proposes a citywide network of projects intended to improve safety and multimodal mobility. Interim City Manager Joe McCann described the document as “a high level master plan organizing things, providing us with some priority and some structure as we move forward in a strategic fashion,” and said staff will return with an implementation strategy and funding proposals later this summer.

Consultant Andrew Pala said the plan grew from a 2024 kickoff and public review held January 22–February 16, 2026. Pala summarized the plan’s purpose: “The goal of the plan really wasn't to redo work that's already been done. It's really about bringing everything together,” and explained the document includes a network of proposed projects, conceptual designs for key corridors, cost opinions and technical appendices including a Synchro traffic analysis.

Key outcomes and priorities The consultant identified a universe of projects that includes 46 bikeway projects, 39 crossing-improvement projects and nine roadway extension or bridge projects (two bridge replacements and three new bridges among them). Priority projects highlighted in the plan include the Adam Street extension, Oak Avenue extension, Pope Street Bridge realignment and off-street trail connections such as the Sulfur Creek Trail and Napa River Trail. A Synchro traffic study found all three major extension alternatives would improve operations and emergency routing; the Oak Avenue extension to Grayson showed the greatest systemwide benefits but also entails more extensive right-of-way and environmental impacts.

The Active Transportation Steering Committee (ATSC) recommended Adam Street extension as its highest priority and ranked Oak extension lower; staff noted that committee recommendation was one input for the council to consider.

Public comment and community concerns During the public-comment period several residents urged caution about overbuilding and the scale of some changes. Public commenter Mr. Connealy said the plan appeared to emphasize bicycling in a town with a relatively older population and fewer child bikers, urging a “less is more” approach that preserves small-town character. A Spring Street resident objected to a proposed additional crosswalk and bumpout near Kernney on the grounds it would remove an on-street parking space in front of their home and complicate trash pickup. Maria White Calderon supported better connectivity but warned against adding clutter and small island bumpouts that she said could be trip hazards for strollers, asking for simpler curb ramps instead.

How the plan addressed feedback Consultants reported receiving 68 public comments during the draft-review period, 46 of which came from a single individual, and described several changes and clarifications made to the final plan: Madrona Avenue was changed from a class 2 bike lane to a class 3 bike boulevard; plan text was updated to reference AB 413 and recommend red-curb daylighting where appropriate to improve intersection visibility near schools; bulbouts were recommended at specific locations (Hillview near the middle school and Hillview at Kernney); and a discrepancy in class 2 facility cost estimates was corrected to lower the lower-end cost range.

Funding and next steps Staff and consultants emphasized that adoption is not project authorization. McCann and consultants said the plan provides a framework for prioritizing projects in the city's capital improvement program and for pursuing outside funding. Measure U is identified as a central local funding source; staff also listed grants, development impact fees, developer contributions and financing tools such as an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District as potential resources. Council members and staff discussed using local funds to advance design and environmental work to make larger projects more competitive for state and federal funding.

What the resolution does (and does not) The adopted resolution accepts the Streets Master Plan as a guiding document and directs staff to use it in future transportation planning and CIP development. City staff reiterated that specific projects, designs and construction actions will require separate council approvals, budgeting and, where necessary, environmental review.

The council vote Council member Bareric: yes. Council member Spado: yes. Vice Mayor Dy: yes. Mayor Dorne: yes.

What’s next Staff said they will return with an implementation and funding strategy for council review (anticipated in July or August) that will prioritize short-, medium- and long-term projects and explore funding avenues to advance design and construction work. The plan’s appendices provide high-level cost opinions and a variety of funding mechanisms staff can evaluate as they develop a programmatic strategy.